AUSTIN - Opponents of a proposed amendment to the Texas Constitution banning same-sex marriage said Monday the initiative's poor wording could effectively nullify all marriages.

Proposition 2 on the Nov. 8 ballot states that marriage exists only as a union of one man and one woman.

It then adds that the state or political subdivision of the state "may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

"That in the hands of an activist judge could lead to the ruin of my marriage and every other marriage in this state because the status that is most identical to marriage is obviously marriage itself," said Trampes Crow, a graduate student at the University of Texas and a former army captain who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, who authored the amendment, called the group's assertion "ludicrous" and said no legal scholar could possibly agree that Proposition 2 could negate traditional marriages.

"It's just crazy," said Chisum, who has long championed measures to block same-sex marriage in Texas. "This is politics at its lowest level here. They're just trying to scare people."

Rally against amendment

Crow, 31, spoke at a rally opposing the amendment along with members of a political action committee calling itself Save Texas Marriage. The rally coincided with early voting on nine proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution.

At least eight political action committees trying to influence the ballot initiative had raised more than $500,000 one month before the election, according to Texans for Public Justice, a group that tracks campaign donations.

Opponents had raised $391,484, more than three times as much as the $121,712 contributions in support of the proposed amendment. Yet, only two donors — San Antonio businessman James Leininger and Houston homebuilder Bob Perry — had supplied 90 percent of the money supporting the proposed Texas Marriage Amendment, Texans for Public Justice noted.

"Legislators did such a poor job of drafting the amendment that all marriages in the state of Texas are at risk of being invalidated," Crow said as the key speaker at the opposition rally. "It may seem incredible, but look at the constitutional amendment and see just how it threatens the very institution it means to protect."

Chisum said he knew of no lawyer who believes that the proposition's language poses a problem, but Austin attorney Catherine Mauzy said she thinks it does.

"I'm a board-certified family lawyer," Mauzy said. "I think that could easily be an interpretation by an activist judge. It seems real clear to me — identical to marriage."

The proposed amendment's language might also imperil common-law marriage, said Mauzy, who said she has handled several family-law cases involving common-law marriages.

"This statute would say they were never married," she said.

Richard R. Carlson, a family law expert at South Texas College of Law, disagrees with those who warn of an activist judge negating all marriages.

"I think that the history behind the proposition will make it easy enough for the courts to determine what it means. They don't look only at the text but consider its origins and its purpose," he said.

Calls called deceptive

Kelly Shackelford, president and chief counsel at the Plano-based Free Market Foundation, called organizers of Save Texas Marriage "pretty shady" and said they are intentionally trying to confuse voters.

He accused the group of making deceptive telephone calls to voters in which they "at least pretend to be reverends" who are worried that Proposition 2 will threaten traditional marriage.

"They end the call by saying, 'God bless you,' " he said. "This is just disgusting and reprehensible conduct."

However, those identifying themselves as pastors calling in behalf of Save Texas Marriage are actual members of the clergy, said Karen Kalergis, a spokeswoman for the group.